Biblical concept of original sin

[NewCreation435]

The issue in question is the "how" of Christ's death, not that He died or for what reason. The point being brought up to defend the doctrine of original sin.

Josiah argues that it was the weight of the world's sin that caused Christ's body to die. I think it is being tortured and nailed to a cross.

I have simply asked for proof of the method or "how" of this idea that it is the former (death via weight of the world's sins) vrs the latter (from torture and the cross) from the Gospels (if people can find it in Matthew or John, preferred, as I disregard Mark and Luke).

So if I've missed something, please do tell, instead of getting defensive, thanks.

If instead it's not there, well...

Oh okay. I would say that this is impossible to confirm because we obviously can't see the sin that Jesus died for nor would we want to.

 

[Josiah]

If babies have sin what sin is it that they have? Are you referring to "original sin"

See post # 5.


Yes, children have sin. Their nature is not exactly as is God's, they "fall short" (which is the exact definition of "sin"). Yes, we are talking about original sin ... thus there is no need to speak of actualized sin. I did not specifically state that infants always are committing sins (symptoms of original sin) of thought, word or deed - of omission or commission. I think one CAN make a case of that (and two in this thread have done so) but I'm simply saying they have sin. And yes, ONE of the many things that evidence that is that they die since the Bible states that for humans death is the result of sin... and it is not the case that no human ever dies prior to 12:01AM on their Xth birthday. See post # 5.




.

 

[Josiah]

Josiah argues that it was the weight of the world's sin that caused Christ's body to die.

Josiah said nothing of the sort.

Josiah addressed the relationship between Christ's death and our atonement. And that His death is related to OUR sin that He took upon Himself.

 

[MoreCoffee]

See post # 5.


Yes, children have sin. Their nature is not exactly as is God's, they "fall short" (which is the exact definition of "sin"). Yes, we are talking about original sin ... thus there is no need to speak of actualized sin. I did not specifically state that infants always are committing sins (symptoms of original sin) of thought, word or deed - of omission or commission. I think one CAN make a case of that (and two in this thread have done so) but I'm simply saying they have sin. And yes, ONE of the many things that evidence that is that they die since the Bible states that for humans death is the result of sin... and it is not the case that no human ever dies prior to 12:01AM on their Xth birthday. See post # 5

Post #5 does not make the case you appear to think it does.

When you write "ONE of the many things that evidence that is that they die since the Bible states that for humans death is the result of sin" how exactly does that apply to Jesus who also died and what does it say about Enoch and Elijah who appear not to have died.

 

[Josiah]

When you write "ONE of the many things that evidence that is that they die since the Bible states that for humans death is the result of sin" how exactly does that apply to Jesus who also died and what does it say about Enoch and Elijah who appear not to have died.

1. Jesus DID die.... but the Catholic Church agrees with all other Christians that Jesus died for OUR sin, which He accepted upon Himself. This your own denomination teaches, I'm not sure why you disagree.

2. Yes, we have a FEW exceptions of people taken into heaven before death happened to them. Those two exceptions do not render Scripture wrong when it states, "the wages of sin is death." And they do not render Scripture (and your denomination) wrong when it states that Jesus had no sin and that He died for our sin.

Post #5 does not make the case you appear to think it does.

What "case" do I make that the Scriptures in post # 5 do not support?

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

It is interesting to me some of the arguments being brought forth.

Idea: Infants die to to original or inherited sin (er...let's assume this wasn't because of being dropped or obliterated in a car crash...but maybe just because of sickness of sudden infant death syndrome or something like that...)

Somehow reconciles with the idea that a multiple murderer can live to his or her 70's or more in jail.

Gee. If I were to judge these things as both being true, I'd say God somehow favors greater wickedness with longer life. Fortunately, I don't believe in inherited sin.

All die as a result of sin. It's not the cause. Quit conflating the two and you'll be fine.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

When you write "ONE of the many things that evidence that is that they die since the Bible states that for humans death is the result of sin" how exactly does that apply to Jesus who also died and what does it say about Enoch and Elijah who appear not to have died.

You can do better than that. These are clear exceptions. God, being who he is, can (and did) apparently spare Enoch and Elijah a physical death. Christ, being sinless, experienced physical death but triumphed over it, or else he is not who he says he is.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You can do better than that. These are clear exceptions. God, being who he is, can (and did) apparently spare Enoch and Elijah a physical death. Christ, being sinless, experienced physical death but triumphed over it, or else he is not who he says he is.

Friend ImaginaryDay2, my concern is not with the theology. As Josiah pointed out Christians accept that Jesus is exceptional especially regarding sin so his death (theologically speaking) has a different significance from the deaths of other human beings and he died because of the violent and wicked actions (sinful actions) of others and not because of any sins of his own. Holy scripture bears witness to him, saying "he knew no sin". But if death is the inevitable consequence of sin (original or actual) then apparently Enoch and possibly Elijah were in some sense innocent thereof. Maybe Enoch was sinless, in the sense of having no actual sins of his own, since holy scripture bears witness about him that "he pleased God" and that "God took him". Elijah was caught up in a chariot of some kind into the skies (and maybe to heaven) but the exact meaning of that is not especially clear. But this thread is about an allegedly "biblical concept of original sin" and I am waiting to see how that is perceived by CH members. Josiah refers to post #5 which he appears to believe presents biblical evidence for a concept of original sin but having reviewed his post several times I see fuel for theological deductions to arrive at something like "original sin" but no explicit biblical teaching that there is such a thing as original sin. This is not to say that I do not believe the doctrine of original sin only that I await a clear biblical statement of the doctrine or a collection of passages that leads inevitably and inexorably to the concept.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

I understand the purpose of the thread, and my responses have been (in the beginning) toward that end. Recent responses have been toward some objections raised by others related to the OP. I think I'm on course. Besides, I so rarely pop my head in to these discussions.

 

[MennoSota]

When did sin originate?
Is sin a social construct of human thinking that evolved over time and experience or is sin a specific point in time when man rebelled against God's command?
Your answer will determine whether you choose to believe in original sin or in the origin of sin. Which do you choose and...why?

 

[NewCreation435]

So having started this thread I think I will try and answer my own question. However difficult it may be to put into words.
I see original sin as defined as a depravity or an inclination towards sin that did not exist before the fall of man in the garden. There is a depravity or a tendency towards sin as before the fall this inclination did not exist. One of the many texts that we could turn to is in Matthew 15:18-20 where it says
18 "But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, [a]fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders. 20 These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile the man.”

I know Stravinsk doesn't like Paul but Paul did say in Ephesians 2:1-3
"As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath.

There is the concept, that due to the fall that people are either saved or lost. We begin with this inclination towards sin, what Paul says results in a spiritual condition in which we are dead in our transgressions and sins. This is part of the war for the believer. That the old nature and the new exist toward when a person is saved and now there is this constant battle between the flesh and the Spirit about who is in control of our lives. Making Jesus Lord of our lives becomes a daily decision.

I believe this highlights how sin is birthed in the heart of man. This is in essence the problem with mankind, it has a heart problem. I believe you see this time and again if your a student of history. Also look at how quickly and repeatedly Israel falls away from God and does it own thing, following after idols, golden calves even when warned repeatedly by the prophets that judgment is coming if they don't repent. We have this natural tendency now towards doing our own thing. And the thing is that Satan doesn't care who is on the throne of our lives, just so long as it isn't Jesus.

 

[MoreCoffee]

So having started this thread I think I will try and answer my own question. However difficult it may be to put into words.
I see original sin as defined as a depravity or an inclination towards sin that did not exist before the fall of man in the garden. There is a depravity or a tendency towards sin as before the fall this inclination did not exist. One of the many texts that we could turn to is in Matthew 15:18-20 where it says
18 "But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, [a]fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders. 20 These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile the man.”

I know Stravinsk doesn't like Paul but Paul did say in Ephesians 2:1-3
"As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath.

There is the concept, that due to the fall that people are either saved or lost. We begin with this inclination towards sin, what Paul says results in a spiritual condition in which we are dead in our transgressions and sins. This is part of the war for the believer. That the old nature and the new exist toward when a person is saved and now there is this constant battle between the flesh and the Spirit about who is in control of our lives. Making Jesus Lord of our lives becomes a daily decision.

I believe this highlights how sin is birthed in the heart of man. This is in essence the problem with mankind, it has a heart problem. I believe you see this time and again if your a student of history. Also look at how quickly and repeatedly Israel falls away from God and does it own thing, following after idols, golden calves even when warned repeatedly by the prophets that judgment is coming if they don't repent. We have this natural tendency now towards doing our own thing. And the thing is that Satan doesn't care who is on the throne of our lives, just so long as it isn't Jesus.

Neither Matthew 15:18-20 nor Ephesians 2:1-3 relate the state of people as sinners to the account in Genesis 3 of the "fall". It may seem reasonable to create a link but it is not a link written in the text.

 

[Stravinsk]

Josiah argues that it was the weight of the world's sin that caused Christ's body to die. I think it is being tortured and nailed to a cross.

Josiah said nothing of the sort.

Josiah addressed the relationship between Christ's death and our atonement. And that His death is related to OUR sin that He took upon Himself.

[Staff Edit]

You clearly said Christ's death was a result of OUR sins. Your text is bolded and underlined below and includes the context of the conversation showing exactly what you meant.

The result of sin is death. Do babies die? The Bible says the reason why humans die is..... what?

Jesus died.

...because He accepted the sins of the world. He didn't die as a result of HIS sin (Catholics agree with all other Christians that He had no sin) but OURS. It's in the Bible. And the Church Fathers. And in the latest edition of the official RCC Catechism (608, etc.).


See post # 5



- Josiah




.

 

[Josiah]

[Staff Edit]

You clearly said Christ's death was a result of OUR sins. Your text is bolded and underlined below and includes the context of the conversation showing exactly what you meant.

Yes, you prove yourself wrong. I said that Jesus' death is the RESULT of our sin. You stated: "Josiah argues that it was the weight of the world's sin that caused Christ's body to die." Of course, I never posted such a silly thing - as you now admit. Who is being dishonest here?

I know you disagree, but Christians tend to believe that Jesus was without sin.... and that He died NOT die as a result of His sin (He had none) but rather as a result of our sin which He took upon Himself. Whether you agree with that or not is immaterial, it is the Christian view and it is what Scripture states.



BACK TO THE ISSUE....



- Josiah




.

 

[MoreCoffee]

[MENTION=13]Josiah[/MENTION], Jesus died because he was killed - executed - by other people.

 

[Josiah]

[MENTION=13]Josiah[/MENTION], Jesus died because he was killed - executed - by other people.

Perhaps the Romans killed his body*. But His death is the result of sin (ours, not His). So teaches The Roman Catholic Church and every other denomination known to me. If you reject that Jesus was sinless and/or reject that Jesus TOOK upon HIMSELF the sins of the world and/or that He died as a result of that sin.... take that up with your denomination. Not me. Sometimes I think you are SO determined to disagree with any Protestant that you end up separating yourself from your own denomination (seen it several other times, too).



BACK TO THE ISSUE....



* Actually, the Bible says that JESUS "gave up" His spirit - not that it was taken from Him (a point our Catholic teachers stressed). Jesus sacrificed Himself, He was not sacrificed. As our Catholic teachers stressed, Jesus is BOTH the Great High Priest and the Pascal Lamb.



.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Perhaps the Romans killed his body*. But His death is the result of sin (ours, not His).

Holy scripture says "This same [Jesus] being delivered up, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you by the hands of wicked men have crucified and slain. " Acts 2:23

 

[Josiah]

Holy scripture says "This same [Jesus] being delivered up, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you by the hands of wicked men have crucified and slain. "

Take up your rejection of Jesus dying for our sins with your denomination. Ask your priest (if he has time for you). He would likely urge you to read your Catechism #595-609 (because obviously, you haven't). It seems you are often SO eager to disagree with any Protestant that you reject fundamental teachings of your own denomination in the process.


BACK TO THE TOPIC....



.

 

[Josiah]

.


Fundamentally, "original sin" is the belief that all humans have as fundamental spiritual "disease" It is universal (not limited by age, race, gender, ethnicity, education, etc.). It means we "fall short" (the meaning of the word "sin") of God's character and will, His righteousness and love. We have this propensity.

What is the Law? The Law is the will of God - flowing from His absolute perfection and justice. It is, in essence, that we be as He is - not in terms of essence but character.


Psalm 51:5 "I was sinful at birth"

Genesis 8:21, "Every inclination of man's heart is evil from childhood."

Romans 5:12, "Sin entered the world through one man's sin, and death through sin, and therefore death came to all men for all have sinned."

Romans 3:12, "There is no one who does good, not even one."

Mark 10:18, "There is none who is good but God exclusively."

First John 1:10, "If we claim we have no sin, we make God a liar and His word is not in us."



What does the Law mandate? Essentially, that our character be identical to His.


Matthew 5:48, "You must be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect."

1 Peter 1:16, "You must be holy even as God in heaven is holy."

John 15:12, "Love all people just as I (Jesus) first loved you."

Ephesians 4:32, "forgiving one another, just as God in Christ first forgave you."

First John 2:6, "Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did."

Philippians 2:5, "You must have the same attitude that Christ did."



What is Sin? The word literally means "to miss the mark." In ancient Greece, if an archer missed the target he therefore "sinned." It means to fall short of a standard, to miss the goal.


Romans 3:23 "For all sin and fall short."



Historically, Christians have spoken of ORIGINAL SINand ACTUALIZED SIN.....

Original: The inclination, the propensity, that DISEASE that means we are self-centered, egotistical, self-serving, rebellious. It's what is in our hearts that LEADS to sins, it is the root of sin. When a man shoots his boss, the "problem" didn't start with the bullet entering the guys' chest, it began with something deep in the heart of the shooter - which LEAD to the chain of things that ultimately meant his pointed his gun and pulled the trigger. If I have a cold, I may sneeze. The sneeze is not the disease, it flows from the disease (which I may have even if I'm not sneezing at that microsecond; even if I take enough pills to never sneeze I still have a cold).


Actualized: These are the symptoms. They may be our thoughts or our words or our deeds. They may be known (observed) or not (even the sinner may not be aware of them). They may be thoughts or words of deeds we SHOULD have had but didn't (being imperfect)... they may be thoughts or words or deeds we should NOT have had but did (being sinful).

Context tells us which is meant in Scripture, but often ORIGINAL SIN is spoken of in the singular ("he who is without sin cast the firs stone") whereas ACTUALIZED SIN is often spoken of in the plural (Galatians 5:19-21)



Thank you.


Pax Christi


- Josiah




.

.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Take up your rejection of Jesus dying for our sins with your denomination. Ask your priest (if he has time for you). He would likely urge you to read your Catechism #595-609 (because obviously, you haven't). It seems you are often SO eager to disagree with any Protestant that you reject fundamental teachings of your own denomination in the process.

Somehow you manage to make every discussion into a personal attack complete with insults and accusations.


The Catechism says

CCC 595 Among the religious authorities of Jerusalem, not only were the Pharisee Nicodemus and the prominent Joseph of Arimathaea both secret disciples of Jesus, but there was also long-standing dissension about him, so much so that St. John says of these authorities on the very eve of Christ's Passion, "many.. . believed in him", though very imperfectly. This is not surprising, if one recalls that on the day after Pentecost "a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith" and "some believers. . . belonged to the party of the Pharisees", to the point that St. James could tell St. Paul, "How many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed; and they are all zealous for the Law."

CCC 596 The religious authorities in Jerusalem were not unanimous about what stance to take towards Jesus. The Pharisees threatened to excommunicate his followers. To those who feared that "everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and destroy both our holy place and our nation", the high priest Caiaphas replied by prophesying: "It is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish." The Sanhedrin, having declared Jesus deserving of death as a blasphemer but having lost the right to put anyone to death, hands him over to the Romans, accusing him of political revolt, a charge that puts him in the same category as Barabbas who had been accused of sedition. The chief priests also threatened Pilate politically so that he would condemn Jesus to death.

CCC 597 The historical complexity of Jesus' trial is apparent in the Gospel accounts. The personal sin of the participants (Judas, the Sanhedrin, Pilate) is known to God alone. Hence we cannot lay responsibility for the trial on the Jews in Jerusalem as a whole, despite the outcry of a manipulated crowd and the global reproaches contained in the apostles' calls to conversion after Pentecost. Jesus himself, in forgiving them on the cross, and Peter in following suit, both accept "the ignorance" of the Jews of Jerusalem and even of their leaders. Still less can we extend responsibility to other Jews of different times and places, based merely on the crowd's cry: "His blood be on us and on our children!", a formula for ratifying a judicial sentence. As the Church declared at the Second Vatican Council: . . . [N]either all Jews indiscriminately at that time, nor Jews today, can be charged with the crimes committed during his Passion. . . [T]he Jews should not be spoken of as rejected or accursed as if this followed from holy Scripture.

CCC 598 In her Magisterial teaching of the faith and in the witness of her saints, the Church has never forgotten that "sinners were the authors and the ministers of all the sufferings that the divine Redeemer endured." Taking into account the fact that our sins affect Christ himself, the Church does not hesitate to impute to Christians the gravest responsibility for the torments inflicted upon Jesus, a responsibility with which they have all too often burdened the Jews alone: We must regard as guilty all those who continue to relapse into their sins. Since our sins made the Lord Christ suffer the torment of the cross, those who plunge themselves into disorders and crimes crucify the Son of God anew in their hearts (for he is in them) and hold him up to contempt. And it can be seen that our crime in this case is greater in us than in the Jews. As for them, according to the witness of the Apostle, "None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." We, however, profess to know him. And when we deny him by our deeds, we in some way seem to lay violent hands on him. Nor did demons crucify him; it is you who have crucified him and crucify him still, when you delight in your vices and sins.

CCC 599 Jesus' violent death was not the result of chance in an unfortunate coincidence of circumstances, but is part of the mystery of God's plan, as St. Peter explains to the Jews of Jerusalem in his first sermon on Pentecost: "This Jesus [was] delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God." This Biblical language does not mean that those who handed him over were merely passive players in a scenario written in advance by God.

​